| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Jacob Champion <pchampion(at)vmware(dot)com>, "rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com" <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers |
| Date: | 2022-03-24 17:55:29 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZiXgCCWsKkwpniha-tpgzfKvBQBv2qvMLuyX7qhZAcyg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 4:27 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> I don't think we should commit this without synchronizing the authn between
> worker / leader (in a separate commit). Too likely that some function that's
> marked parallel ok queries the authn_id, opening up a security/monitoring hole
> or such because of a bogus return value.
It is not free to copy data from the leader to the worker. I don't
think we should just adopt a policy of copying everything anyone
thinks of, because then most of the time we'll be copying a bunch of
stuff that really isn't needed.
My gut reaction is to think that this is way too marginal to be worth
making parallel-safe, but it is also possible that I just don't know
enough to understand its true value.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-03-24 18:02:59 | Re: [HACKERS] WIP aPatch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors |
| Previous Message | Zheng Li | 2022-03-24 17:54:39 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |